Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Herring v. United States

United States Supreme Court
555 U.S. 135 (2009)

Herring v. United States

Facts

A police investigator asked the Coffee County’s warrant clerk if there were any warrants out for Herring’s (defendant) arrest. When none were found, the investigator asked the clerk to check with the clerk in Dale County, who reported that there was one active arrest warrant. The investigator asked that a copy of the arrest warrant be faxed over as confirmation. However, when the Dale County clerk looked for the actual warrant she could not find it and discovered that the warrant had been recalled. She immediately called to tell the Coffee County clerk, who radioed to tell the investigator. However, while all this only took 10 to 15 minutes to transpire, the investigator had already pulled Herring over, arrested him and, after conducting a search of his car, found drugs and a gun. Herring was charged with illegally possessing drugs and a gun. He moved to have the drugs and the gun suppressed at trial because there was in fact no warrant for his arrest and thus his initial arrest had been unlawful. The trial court denied the motion on the ground that the investigator acted in good faith, and therefore, the exclusionary rule would not serve to deter future police misconduct. The court of appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Roberts, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Ginsburg, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.